• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The Internet Journal of Healthcare Administration >The Ethicality of Capping Non-Economic Damages to Control Rising Healthcare Costs: Panacea or False and Misleading Practice?
【24h】

The Ethicality of Capping Non-Economic Damages to Control Rising Healthcare Costs: Panacea or False and Misleading Practice?

机译：限制非经济损失以控制不断上涨的医疗保健费用的伦理学：万能药还是错误和误导性做法？

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Since the mid-70's, the healthcare industry has been plagued with three primary concerns: quality, costs and access. Several incremental measures have been taken by Congress to address these issues, most notably the passage of the Health Maintenance Organizational Act of 1973, and the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Although neither legislative initiative was intended to be a panacea for controlling escalating healthcare costs, the acts gave impetus to the establishment of a variety of Managed Care Organizations (MCOs) and controlled governmental expenditures that seem to have had a positive impact on healthcare expenditures. Consequently, the health care industry experienced a stabilization of healthcare expenditures, partially attributed to both legislative initiatives. In the decade of the 90's, healthcare insurance premiums and healthcare costs experienced a period of decline. However, this period of economic euphoria did not last long. Toward the end of the 20th Century, healthcare expenditures and insurance premiums began to escalate again and increased concern was reflected among the industry's primary stakeholders. Therefore, in an effort to address the next round of increasing costs, the focus shifted to another battle front, medical tort reform. Specifically, capping non-economic damages as a an exclusive remedy to rising healthcare costs. This article explores the rationale for capping non-economic damages as an attempt to address rising healthcare costs and malpractice premiums. Specifically, it examines the ethicality of imposing caps as evaluated from a principle of justice perspective.
机译：自70年代中期以来，医疗保健行业一直困扰着三个主要问题：质量，成本和可及性。国会为解决这些问题采取了多项渐进措施，最著名的是通过了1973年的《健康维持组织法》和1997年的《平衡预算法》。尽管这两项立法举措都不是控制不断上升的医疗费用的灵丹妙药，这些行为推动了各种管理医疗组织（MCO）的建立和政府支出的控制，这些支出似乎对医疗保健支出产生了积极影响。因此，医疗保健行业经历了医疗保健支出的稳定，部分归因于两项立法举措。在90年代的十年中，医疗保险费和医疗费用经历了一段时期的下降。但是，这段时期的经济欣欣向荣并没有持续很长时间。到20世纪末，医疗保健支出和保险费开始再次上升，并且该行业的主要利益相关者越来越担心。因此，为了应对下一轮不断增加的成本，重点已转移到另一个战线，即医疗侵权改革。特别是，将非经济损失的上限限制为医疗费用上涨的唯一补救措施。本文探讨了限制非经济损失的理由，以试图解决不断上涨的医疗保健费用和医疗事故保费。具体而言，它从正义原则的角度审查了施加上限的道德。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号